OnTheReel

Like everything, it depends on the dealer doing the work. Obviously not everyone’s experiences are as horrible as what some have shared or we’d have a lot more engine failures in the world. Most people are not enthusiasts. Or they are too busy / physically unable to do the job themselves. So it’s important to keep perspective that dealer oil changes go just fine almost all of the time...you just don’t hear about it. Personally, I have no issue spending the $60-$80 to get the oil changed and tires rotated. And even less issue using the free one. ?

He had to keep the ball at least 6 feet away from the plate. Everyone knows the new rules.

They are “starting out” with E-Learning here, the county I reside in just announced it today. Of course by “starting out”, we can assume they mean at least the rest of the year, if not much longer. Since they are clearly not following the science (one of their favorite terms), anything goes and the goal will keep changing. All of this comes after many of the districts passed huge referendums back in the fall. Unfortunately you don’t need those multi-million dollar renovations for empty buildings. Hell, you don’t even need the buildings. Instead of pissing money away on ineffective E-learning “upgrades”, give the people our tax dollars back and let us use it for private schools that will actually teach kids. Because giving a 6 year old an iPad and expecting them to learn anything is outrageous. Any time wasted with this is time that will never be recovered. It’s not a golf tournament or baseball season that we can shorten or continue to postpone without consequence.

Yeah, I use the back buttons a lot too. I think it’s safe to assume all 2020 GMCs have the back buttons...every one I’ve seen has them, even on SLE trim (like the mule). Maybe it’s a Chevy thing now. Have to step up to professional grade to get the back buttons.

Hard to say but it looks like the 2022 mule in question has the buttons on the back doors.

Safe to assume most, if not all, of the electronics will be new...welcome back the bugs. My truck’s bugs never left anyway. At worst it’s a lateral move for me.

Yeah, they made a mess of mine fixing the leak. You have to drop the headliner to pull the cab spoiler...so just about everything inside gets man-handled. Left a bunch of fingerprints all over the headliner, and a few broken trim pieces. I can’t ****** anymore though, everything was made right and it’s been a year with no leaky so I’m happy.

I’ve seen a few people do it here and/ or on Facebook. Not sure if they used their own money or GM’s though. Seems like a shame to remove optional equipment to stay dry. Such a long running problem now...wonder what 2021 will bring.

A lot of what the climate control does is based off the solar sensor on the dash rather than the temperature. I’m assuming since So Cal has plenty of sun, that might be placing extra demand on the A/C system beyond just temperature or humidity. I’ve noticed on days that are not really hot but very sunny, my A/C runs too much for the temperature I set it at. Usually 70-72. I don’t think the programming for the climate control is optimal. Just an observation, not really much we can do about it. Maybe tinted windows would help a bit but that’s not legal here.

Dumb, but the model year is basically over anyway. Can’t be more than another month until 2021 production I would think.

Yeah, I think right now it’s just too hot everywhere. If I forget to disable the feature it usually only shuts down for 15-30 seconds tops before the A/C starts blowing warm and needs to kick back on. One of the reasons I disable it...more harm than good for such a short shutdown interval. In the fall or spring, ambient temps in the 40s or 50s, she’ll hit the shutdown time limit at long lights. Which I believe is around 2 minutes or so.

Doesn’t entirely make sense but it does sound like the 3.42s kill economy (along with obvious; city driving, idling and speed.) Since you and I are getting the exact same numbers, and nowhere near some of these other guys...not many other explanations. This truck is a major pig compared to my 2016 5.3. The weight reduction and additional transmission gears do nothing since the new body style is so huge in comparison.

It’s easy to get to a 50% increase in an age group where numbers are so low to begin with. If there’s two 15 year olds in the hospital, and a third is added...well that’s a 50% increase without changing the actual number all that much. Granted that’s an exaggeration but a 50% increase may or may not be a meaningful amount or trend. Presumably since there are no deaths in California in that age group, the number of hospitalizations must also be exceedingly low. In other words, I bet a 12% decrease in 65+ amounts to more people than a 50% increase 0-17.

So in other words the lockdowns only work in theory, not in practice. And kids are safer at school than home. Sounds like something I have been saying for 6 months...? Interesting day here in WI. Hospitalizations are at a four month low...167 total. We were “wide open party city” for the 4th of July too...only nothing has really happened in this state. ? I think it’s extremely relevant, but nobody in the media agrees? They continue to be hyper-focused on “record” positive test results to scare people when hospitalizations and deaths are all that really matter. The rest to me is garbage in and garbage out.

I dunno what you’re talking about, Democrats have everything totally under control. ?

12.9 over the last 400 miles. City driving, lead foot, and plenty of idling since I have to eat lunch in my truck now.

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/508059-british-pharmaceutical-says-small-coronavirus-trial-signals-possible-major Some really great news for once. Small trial, still early, but it seems promising and definitely worthy of a fast track study to get it out in wider circulation. Effective treatments are better than a vaccine as far as I’m concerned. They wouldn’t rely on the logistics of vaccines, or the personal opinions of people on vaccines. You’d only be applying the treatments to those who need it, as they need it, so the number of “doses” required would be far less than that of the vaccines. Once available, reserve the vaccines for higher risk people and persons working with the public. The general population, younger, healthy people wouldn’t necessarily need to be vaccinated if there’s a few different viable treatments for them in the unlikely event that they develop complications. Eventually we would reach something of herd immunity and hopefully put the masks away. Doesn’t hurt to be optimistic I guess.

Just to touch base on this again, this was clarified later on that it was a cumulative total since March. The early reports were worded in a way that made it appear as though kids might be the next shoe to drop...as if there was a recent, massive outbreak among babies. But like so much of news it was a half truth. Article in link was quietly updated to add in “since March”...there’s that darn context once again. Not picking on you, every media source took this story and ran. Just another example of what I’ve been talking about. The damage is done by the time the real story comes out. How many people are still thinking that babies are being infected en masse off the initial take of the article? Too many.

I completely agree. Also, I shouldn’t have said it’s not relevant to Covid-19, it is. The chart was just not specific. My point was when someone says the numbers can’t be fudged, they shouldn’t then proceed to fudge the numbers in the same sentence. The distrust in the media many have originates from this very type of act.

Again, that chart would look more or less the same with or without Covid. I shared the whole link, I am not trying to hide it. It’s simply not relevant to Covid-19 and not specific to Covid-19. Read the other study I posted. ICU occupancy is always above 60%. There’s the context. No one would care about that graph any other year, even though it would have the same exact numbers in it.

They do not have a chart showing ICU beds specifically as it pertains to Covid-19 patients. As a whole, the ICU is 61% occupied, which is...normal? If one feels that being at 61% capacity means the majority of ICUs are “near maximum”...you could have made the exact same argument last year, ten years ago, etc. Percentage is always in the 60s, even without Covid-19. I grant there are hotspots that are damn near full or full. Doesn’t change that the statement: “the majority of ICUs are near maximum” posted in a coronavirus thread is not only inaccurate, but it implies the ICUs are full of Covid patients. https://www.khou.com/mobile/article/news/health/coronavirus/texas-hospital-icus-crowded-with-covid-19-patients-as-coronavirus-continues-to-spread/285-aad0788d-256e-4454-8e3f-87f9c7956680 Only 27% are Covid patients. So if there was a graph showing Covid ICU patients, we can extrapolate that it would look close to the inpatient graph by the numbers. Hotspots in red, rest of the country in blue. Also notable, Houston would be above average in ICU patients even without Covid.

Uh, you kinda just fudged it right there! “Majority of ICU‘s near maxed out”? https://www.cdc.gov/nhsn/covid19/report-patient-impact.html We are in a transition period to whom hospitals report to, but the last CDC numbers showed the national ICU occupancy at 61%. If I can do a grumpy for a minute...61% on a test is a D-, not an A. Nowhere near the maximum. And if 61% sounds high, consider this study from before Covid-19...ICU occupancy rates were in the high 60 percent range just on a normal year. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5520980/ Break down the occupancy further...even if you look at the areas where the ICUs ARE at capacity...at worst 25%-30% account for COVID patients. Bad? Yes. But most states are so far below that it’s hardly on the scale, less than 5%. Like everything, context matters, doesn’t it?

In the end, the president has little control over the matter, it’s being handled district by district here. Probably the way it should be, but unfortunately a lot of them have no interest in coming anywhere near fully open or open at all. Even in areas to which there is no outbreak to speak of. I personally believe we can open the schools very close to full/ normal with very little risk. And the harm done by not doing so outweighs any benefit that might be realized. That’s my stance on many other things as well, but the schools seem so obvious to me. You’re talking about kids who are Teflon to this virus. Instead of dumping money into online learning that will still never work, surely we can find some ways to get it done while still talking precautions for the staff. Just takes ambition rather than sitting around saying there’s nothing we can do, better safe than sorry, etc...

Happy to hear it wasn’t too bad to get going again. Diesels are pure hell to get restarted after running out of fuel and I wondered if these trucks (being direct injected like a diesel) would have the same problem.

I’m not even talking about springing the gates wide open, that’s another debate. My comments were specifically about opening schools. Which will result in virtually no new hospitalizations within the school aged kids, and very few within the parents of the school aged kids who are mostly in their 20s-30s. The numbers are very clear about this, pull from whatever source you want. The fact that they aren’t open shows that this is political, not scientific. It also reflects that the focus has indeed shifted. It is no longer, as you say, flattening the curve. Closing things that were never to be on the curve in the first place makes no sense if that’s all there was to it.